Belief in Falsehoods: When Misinformation Becomes a Symbol of Strength

In an era where facts are increasingly contested, researchers have uncovered a troubling pattern in how some individuals approach misinformation. While many assume false beliefs stem from ignorance or confusion, new research reveals a more deliberate phenomenon: some people consciously embrace falsehoods as a form of psychological resistance.

A groundbreaking study published in the Journal of Social Psychology examined why certain individuals not only believe but actively promote claims that can be easily disproven. The research, conducted during the COVID-19 pandemic, surveyed 5,535 people across eight countries to investigate the psychology behind pandemic-related misinformation.

The researchers found that the strongest predictor of belief in COVID-19 misinformation wasn’t political affiliation, thinking style, or even general attitudes about the pandemic. Rather, it was whether individuals viewed prevention efforts through a lens of symbolic strength versus weakness.

“People with this mindset see adhering to facts as ‘giving in’ to outside influence,” explained one of the social psychologists behind the study. “For them, rejecting obvious truths becomes a form of resistance—a way to demonstrate independence from what they perceive as controlling forces.”

The study measured this mindset by gauging agreement with statements like “Following coronavirus prevention guidelines means you have backed down” and “Continuous coronavirus coverage in the media is a sign we are losing.” Those who agreed with such statements were significantly more likely to believe and spread misinformation about COVID-19 and vaccines.

This symbolic thinking transforms factual debates into psychological battlegrounds. When approached this way, the literal issue—whether it’s fighting a pandemic or understanding economic trends—becomes secondary to a perceived war over autonomy and control. The accuracy of a claim matters less than what endorsing it symbolizes about the person’s independence.

“It’s a paradoxical situation,” noted one researcher. “For these individuals, the more obviously false a claim is, the more powerful it feels to endorse it. It’s essentially saying, ‘I’m so independent that I can reject even the most basic facts if they come from sources I view as adversaries.'”

The research team observed similar patterns beyond the pandemic context. In a related study on cryptocurrency attitudes, participants who viewed crypto investment as a symbol of independence from traditional finance were also more likely to believe in various conspiracy theories, including government cover-ups of alien contact.

Notably, across all studies, this symbolic mindset strongly correlated with authoritarian attitudes, including beliefs that certain groups should dominate others and support for autocratic leadership. This connection helps explain why authoritarian leaders often deploy misinformation as a tool to impress and control their supporters.

These findings highlight significant challenges for traditional fact-checking approaches. When literal truth isn’t the point, direct corrections may actually reinforce the problem.

“To someone with this symbolic mindset, fact-checkers merely demonstrate their own weakness by reacting,” the researchers explained. “What matters to these individuals isn’t accuracy but signaling that they won’t be swayed by outside information.”

Political theorist Murray Edelman, known for his work on political symbolism, noted that politicians often prefer scoring symbolic points over delivering tangible results—simply because it’s easier. Leaders can offer symbolic victories when they have little substantive benefit to provide.

The research underscores the complex psychological underpinnings of today’s information landscape. While the majority of participants did not display this symbolic strength mindset, those who did created significant ripple effects in public discourse.

As societies grapple with the spread of misinformation, this research suggests that addressing the problem requires more than just providing correct information. It necessitates understanding the psychological functions that false beliefs serve and developing approaches that acknowledge the deep-seated need for autonomy and strength that drives some to reject even the most obvious truths.